Wednesday, June 03, 2009

I don’t care who stars in it, or who is directing it. Neither of those things will alter the odds that I see it (I almost certainly will, I just can’t promise I’ll sit through it. Not after Ethan Hawke.)

8 comments:

Have you ever counted the number of adaptations of Jane Eyre that have been made? Every second year is about right for that, too.

Emile Hirsch is a good actor: I was quite impressed with him in "Milk". Thee's no doubt he'll do a better job than Ethan Hawke.

But, frankly, I'm looking forward much more to the taping of the David Tennant Hamlet that the RSC will be releasing later this year.

I'd like to see films of some of the rarer Shakespeares as well. _A Winter's Tale_ would be a good start: I saw it a few years ago at Canada's National Arts Centre and was blown away by the play & its production.

I think Emile Hirsch is very talented, but I think Catherine Hardwick is not. I forsee a reasonably pretty pop-mess, along the lines of Baz Luhrman's "Romeo and Juliet".

Also, I think the adapted setting sounds really inane. For one thing, setting Hamlet in a college completely eliminates one of his most interesting hang-ups, which is that he was forced to return from college where he was much happier, and he wants to go back.

I'm trying to imagine if this will be a poor teeny-bopper adaptation like "She's the man", or a stupid super-forced "modernization" like "Romeo and Juliet" or Ethan Hawk's version. Either way, if Hamlet just happens to be on the school fencing team, I'll walk out of the theatre.

My guess is that most actors would like to be able to say, "I've played Hamlet." --or at least, "Yeah, I've done some Shakespeare."--Can't blame them for that. The question is then, if they're in a position to suggest that they might do one, or some, or any, of the greatest roles ever written (without having to actually audition and compete for them), then why don't they just do them? Why settle for "pretending" that you're "pretending to be Hamlet"?Most of the time, the answer is-- because they can't just "do them". So they rummage around in the "adaptation barrel", searching for a "concept" that might work well enough to draw enough attention away from the fact that they're not doing "Shakespeare" at all. And they have plenty of help. Hollywood and the film industry-the highest paid smoke & mirror PR Marketing & Phony Concept Factory ever..Conceived. What a concept.

You haven't heard? 2 LEARs (besides McKellan), 2 MACs, and Julie Tamor is tackling TEMPEST. Me, I'm waiting for a new Caesar - after ROME, it's only a matter of time...

By the way, I'm in tech for KING LEAR at the Shakespeaere Theatre in D.C., directed by Bob Falls, starring Stacy Keach. It's pretty intense, my friend. If you come, DON'T bring the family. Not at all appropriate. But mind-blowing all the same. It's ruined me for other Lears.

I wonder if the multitude of Lears is directly related to guys like Anthony Hopkins and Robert DeNiro seeing all the press McKellan got for the US tour of his show and wanting to get in on the action.

Macbeth, I dunno, I just saw an Australian one from a couple years back. Seems like that gets done often, you're right.

Tempest I'm thrilled to see. Not sure the last time that one was put to the big screen (not counting Forbidden Planet).

Maybe it just seems this way, but Hamlet just seems like the "go-to" play for director/actors who want to strut their stuff. If IMDB is any indication there are several versions of Hamlet produced *every year*.

Me? I'm waiting for the celluloid remakes of "William Shakespeare's Othello in Da Hood", starring Ice T. "Who you bin wid Desdemona?"Justin Timberlake's brooding,soulful,momma's boy version of "Hamlet, Prince of Denmark",set in a Beverly Hills boutique.And Charlie Sheen's due for a whacko attempt at a career boost...how about Mark Antony--co-starring Britney Spears as Queen of the Nile?Now, there's Box Office.